The distinction between anchors and grounds is one of the most innovative contributions of The Ant Trap. In this commentary I will argue that the distinction suffers from an ambiguity between tokens and types. This leads Epstein to endorse pluralism about anchors and grounds, a position that is not justified in the book and to which there are plausible alternatives.
Epstein on Anchors and Grounds / F. Guala. - In: JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ONTOLOGY. - ISSN 2196-9655. - 2:1(2016), pp. 135-147. [10.1515/jso-2016-0003]
Epstein on Anchors and Grounds
F. Guala
2016
Abstract
The distinction between anchors and grounds is one of the most innovative contributions of The Ant Trap. In this commentary I will argue that the distinction suffers from an ambiguity between tokens and types. This leads Epstein to endorse pluralism about anchors and grounds, a position that is not justified in the book and to which there are plausible alternatives.
File in questo prodotto:
| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
2016_Epstein review (JSO).pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione
588.85 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
588.85 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
